It has been said by some of the most revered humanists of our recent times that the moral test of government is how it treats those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life; the sick, the needy and the handic
It has been said by some of the most revered humanists of our recent times that the moral test of government is how it treats those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life; the sick, the needy and the handicapped.
With slightly different variations, this wisdom comes from the likes of Mahatma Gandhi, Pope John Paul II, and former American vice president Hubert H. Humphrey. It is a notion our "greatest" Canadian, Tommy Douglas, would have embraced.
It matters little what level of government they are talking about, be it federal or at the municipal level. Governments are elected by the people because they are entrusted to make decisions that stand the ultimate test of fairness and respect, while reflecting the needs and wants of its citizens, including the elderly, sick, needy and handicapped.
Tonight, the town will present citizens with three different options for the relocation of the municipal waste transfer facility. Included in the presentation is the town's original controversial choice, a site beside Westwood Court Mobile Home Park, home to about 230 citizens, many of them the same type of people Gandhi and Humphrey referred to when they spoke of the "moral test of government."
Since the spring, the town and its council have been rightly condemned by the community at large for its original site relocation choice. There was no consultation with park residents, lackluster research and little if any thought how such a move would impact park residents, particularly the vulnerable. After all, does anybody – vulnerable or not - want to live beside a dump?
A few times during the controversy there were hints that humility just might prevail and the town would admit its mistake, toss its original decision, and inform its angry citizens it was diligently looking at other options. This would have been a great relief to residents at the park, as well of countless others outside who are justifiably concerned council will once again make decisions without a proper consultation process that could result in huge adverse implications to their neighbourhoods. But the site beside Westwood, which no one wants, remains on the table.
All members of town council are bright and educated people. This story has been extensively reported in this paper, including ones that have detailed the worries and concerns of the trailer park's residents, including its most vulnerable.
On Sept. 19, Mayor Brian Spiller was asked by the Province why council had not taken its original plan off the table. He said, "it hasn't come to council yet", and that any decision would not be ready until Oct. 13.
But council had the opportunity at any time this summer to call a special meeting to decisively deal with this controversy, one that created unnecessary worry and stress for many citizens, not to mention an erosion of confidence for elected officials. Council's procedural guidelines do allow for special meetings to be called at any time, even if a few members were justifiably absent. But that did not happen.
Tonight the town will once again hear from voices of Westwood that it does not want a dump beside their homes, and that any other option away from a residential neighbourhood is preferable. Council will be left with the moral test Gandhi and Humphrey talked about.
An immediate meeting could be called. The only question is whether this council will seize the moment, when good men and women can become that much greater.
